- Ah, parents. When you're growing up you can't help but look up to them, literally, they're taller than you are. But is this metaphorical
stature warranted? Sure, they want what's best for you, but did you know that
they were probably willing to lie to you to get it. That's right, your parents
lied to you about the law. The thing is, if your parents didn't go to law school for three years, and especially if they don't have a popular, law-related YouTube channel, can you really trust them? The answer is no, and Legal Eagle is here to replace them. (bright music) Sponsored by CuriosityStream and Nebula. When it comes to our parents and the law, the real question is, did our
parents get anything right? And why did all of our parents tell us that you have to turn off the dome light in the car while you're driving? Well, we're gonna find out today. So, let's talk about the things that your parents told you about the law that are probably not true. The first, of course,
is staying home alone while your parents shopped. Kevin McAllister was home
alone for several days, and he totally handled it, so why is it that our parents told us that you couldn't stay home alone? I know more than a few of you fantasized about ordering a pizza and
jumping up and down on your bed while your siblings were
forced to spend time at some old relative's house. And, of course, we all plan to do this. - I'm gonna give you to the count of ten to get your ugly, yella,
no-good keister off my property, before I pump your guts full of lead! - But, of course, our parents were worried that we were going to this. - Johnny, I got so much energy. We've gotta start doing stupid (beep). - So, I suppose this might
explain why after the success of "Home Alone," and its numerous sequels, why our parents didn't trust us to outwit hapless burglars on our own. And, of course, they
claim that it was illegal to leave you at home, even if they were just
running to the store. But is it in fact true that the state makes it illegal to leave your kids at home without supervision? Or were your parents just lying
to you out of convenience? Well, the verdict, guess what? They probably lied to you. There isn't a universal age
that is considered appropriate for leaving children home alone, only a few jurisdictions
even have firm rules for how old the child must be before they can stay at home unsupervised. For example, Maryland makes
it illegal to leave a child under eight years old home alone, and a babysitter for someone under eight must be at least 13 years old. And believe me, Maryland
is not messing around, even when it's not
technically against the law. Just ask the couple who let their, quote, "Free Range" kids aged 10 and 16 play unattended in a park, only to have Child Protective Services called on them for neglect. The parents eventually won, but not before their kids were interviewed for hours by the local government, and after years of litigation. The local Maryland government
worse than Harry and Marv? - We know that you're in there
and that you're all alone. - I will let you decide on that one. And Illinois sets the bar even higher. It's considered abuse or neglect to leave a minor under
the age of 14 home, quote, "Without supervision for an
unreasonable period of time "without regard to the
mental or physical health, "safety, or welfare of that minor." But, of course, there is
some wiggle room here. What is considered an
unreasonable period of time? That implies that there is
a reasonable period of time that you can leave a child unattended. And it's not unreasonable
to leave a child at home if the child would essentially be safe, but most states leave it to their local Department of
Health to create guidelines, and these local authorities
consider many different factors. They consider the child's
age, maturity level, how long the child's guardians are gone, whether the house and
neighborhood are safe, whether the child can easily contact their parents or other adult, and most importantly, whether the child can defend themselves
from two violent criminals using nothing but toys,
leftover fishing equipment, and a tarantula. - You guys give up, or
you thirsty for more? - So, there you have it, your parents lied to you, zero to one. Which takes us to the
one that, I don't know, every single child was told
when they were growing up, that you cannot have
the interior lights on in the car while it's driving at night. Now, there's nothing more nerve wracking for a parent than watching
their immature 15-year-old climb into the driver's
seat of a killing machine. You know, your car. What you thought would happen
when you learned to drive, and what your parents thought would happen the minute you got your license. And of course it was no
picnic for your own parents when they're driving
in the pitch black out, and their snot nose kid, i.e. you, wanna turn on the interior light so you can get into even more
shenanigans in the backseat. So, of course, our parents all told us that whether you were driving,
or whether they were driving, it was of course illegal to drive with your interior lights on. But was it? The verdict, your parents probably lied, but they probably did
so for the right reason. Almost everyone watching this video remembers their parents teaching them that they could get a ticket if they drove with the
overhead or mirror lights on, but think back to your
actual driving test. Did they ask you a single question about leaving the interior
lights on while you drove? No, they didn't. That's because, spoiler, it's not illegal. Whether it's advisable to drive
with the interior lights on is a completely separate
question with a different answer, but the answer is that it's
really not a good idea. The light might produce
glare on the windshield that makes it harder to see. If the interior's really bright, it makes it almost impossible to see stuff on the outside that's really dark. A light is also just another distraction, especially if the light is on so that you or the passenger can look at your phones
or a map or anything else that pulls your attention
away from the road. But think about it,
the automotive industry is one of the most regulated
industries in the country, and has been for forever. Do you think that if it was illegal to turn the dome light on in your car that cars would even allow you to turn that light on while it was moving? There's a million things that don't work in the car when you're actually moving. They have the technology to turn it off. But, of course, that's
separate from the idea of whether you should
actually do it or not. And as Phil DeFranco likes to say, "Don't be stupid, stupid." So, parents zero, you two, your parents keep lying to you. But let's talk about skipping school, because this is one thing that all parents want their kids to actually do. And as eagle-eyed observer
Daniel Rodier said, "It was hammered into me
that it was against the law "for me to not be at school." Of course, the perfectly valid reason you have for skipping school, compared to what your parents think happen when you skip school. The verdict, well, this
one could go either way, but I lean on the side of this
being more false than true. Now, before your parents
can protest, let me explain. Although the law typically says that more than three unexcused absences
makes a child truant, which is against the law, it's not strictly illegal for students to miss school at all times. For example, in California,
a school will report students as truant if they
miss school three times without a valid reason or permission. But what counts as a valid
reason to miss school? The exceptions include,
but are not limited to, religious holidays, family vacations, medical appointments,
illnesses, suspensions, family emergencies, if you're
the victim of bullying, or for a much needed mental health break related to because you needed to sleep in, the weather is nice, the weather
is bad, the weather is sad, it's the end of the world as
we know it, it's opening day, Backstreet is back, you're a senior, a cute girl wants you to,
a cute boy wants you to, the McRib is back, the
movie theater's playing all three "Lord of the
Rings" movies in one day, your future's so bright,
you've got to wear shades, there's a new Legal Eagle
video, it's Tuesday, your Animal Crossing turnip
farm needs attention, or you watched the "Lost" finale. Okay, some of these may not technically qualify as exceptions, but the law is a fluid thing. It's only not the case until
someone takes it to trial and make some case law about it. But some of these are
in fact ironclad excuses for not going to school, so be sure you're taking notes. This one, your parents zero, you three, though this might have an asterisk, this one depends on the circumstances for which you are not going to school. But that takes us to the next thing that our parents said was illegal, it was that you can't
drive without wearing shoes or you can't drive wearing flip flops, I'm talking to you, Florida. Here, of course, is what you think you look like driving barefoot, compared to what your
parents think will happen when you drive barefoot. So, the question, can you legally drive without wearing shoes? Your parents thought the answer
was clear, absolutely not. And, of course, driver's ed instructors also reinforced the idea that you have to wear shoes to drive, potentially just because they didn't wanna smell your stinky feet, but people have wondered whether
it was illegal for decades. To get to the bottom of this, researcher Jason R. Heimbaugh
did a research project in the early '90s on whether any state actually made it illegal
to drive barefoot. He contacted every department
of motor vehicle office in the United States. And it turns out that
none of the 50 States or the District of Columbia
bared shoeless driving. Alabama does have a law
requiring you to wear shoes while operating a motorcycle. If you're driving a
motorcycle, wear some shoes, and also a helmet and a leather jacket. But even Alabama doesn't say anything about wearing shoes in a car. But before you celebrate
by burning your shoes and running to your car, there's one important
loophole to think about. The Illinois Director of Driving
Licensing and School Safety told Heimbaugh that even without
a specific law on footwear, police could still give a citation. Illinois Statutes 21-901 A and B prohibit reckless and negligent driving. The director said, quote, "A driver charged under
these articles or any article "would have a right to trial
where the barefoot aspect "of the case might be disputed." And so, the verdict, there's no specific law
that seems to make driving without your shoes on illegal. It's entirely possible that some other motor vehicle law applies, and doing so would be either
reckless or negligent. So, your parents might've
actually told the truth for once, even though they didn't actually know it. And my verdict might surprise you, but I think the police have a lot of laws that they can use to give you a ticket, just like the Grand Poobah of the Illinois Driving Safety said. So, the bottom line, if
you get in an accident while driving barefoot, you might expect to be charged with negligence, reckless driving or operating a vehicle
in an unsafe manner, so check your local ordinances before defying your parents on this one. And as for flip-flops, all right, so that does appear to be legal, but podiatrists hate them
because they destroy your feet. Safe driving experts also hate flip-flops, because they tend to get caught
in the gas or brake pedals. And, of course, anyone that
cares anything about fashion hates them because
flip-flops are terribly ugly. But your parents arguably get one back. Your parents didn't
lie to you on this one, parents one, you three. But that takes us to one
last car-related issue, because, again, apparently
all kids cared about back in the day was being able
to drive or ride in a car. And that's, of course,
that our parents told you that riding in the back of an
open pickup truck was illegal. You and your parents envisioned
riding in a truck bed exactly the same way, you just had a different opinion
of how it would turn out. So, the question is, is it against the law to ride in the back of a truck? And the verdict is in, and it depends. Jurisdictions vary a lot on whether you can legally ride
in the back of a truck. In many States, it's not against the law for anyone to roll down the street in the back of a truck bed. Other States ban riding in truck beds, except under very certain circumstances. Ohio law is pretty representative of the states that have restrictions. State law bans people 15 and
under from riding in the back, unless the vehicle is driven
less than 25 miles per hour or the person is seated and belted in an OEM seating position. Of course, many, many States
now have adopted seatbelt laws that mandate that everyone
in a moving vehicle actually wear their seat belts, and the truck bed is not a
likely place to find a seat belt. So, if you can't wear a seat belt, then you can't ride in
the back of a truck. But if your parents didn't want you riding the back of a truck, they probably had really good reason. The National Highway
Safety Transportation Board says that trucks are
three times more likely to be involved in a rollover crash, and a roll over crash is responsible for the highest number of fatalities, and if you're not seat-belted
in to the back of a truck, your odds are not very good if you get into an actual crash. So, be sure to check with your friendly, neighborhood
personal injury lawyer before you decide to stand
up in the bed of a truck. So, I'm gonna give this
one to your parents, a solid, not lie, your
parents two, you three. And then, finally, let's talk about one that we all heard growing up, that you cannot put a penny
on the railroad tracks because it might derail a train. As a kid, you instinctively
knew how fun train tracks were. Of course, your parents were
worried this would happen. And apparently, the people of Reddit have been told many times
that it's against the law to put a penny on the railroad tracks, because it might derail the train. Really, mom and dad? I mean, let's see what actually happens when you put a coin on
the railroad tracks. Here, YouTuber Millenniumforce
demonstrates exactly what would happen when you
put the coin on the track. You mean the tiny coin
wasn't able to derail a train that had hundreds of thousands of tons of cargo being transported? Your parents lied to you? Well, they definitely lied
about the derailment part but that still doesn't
answer the question, is putting a coin on the
railroad track illegal? And the verdict is yes. It is illegal to put
coins or anything else on the railroad track. Most states penalize people if
they mess with train tracks, even if it's not actually
going to cause a derailment. For instance, Texas
Penal Code section 28.07 makes it a crime to interfere
with railroad property. This crime includes situations
where a person, quote, "Places an obstruction on a
railroad track or right-of-way." California's law makes it clear that any obstruction is a crime, quote, "Every person who maliciously
does either of the following "is punishable by imprisonment, "places any obstruction upon the rails "or tracks of any railroad, "or of any switch, branch, branchway, "or turnout connected with any railroad." The any obstruction could
even include a coin. Now, a smart lawyer could
devise perhaps a decent defense, because as the video demonstrates, a flat penny is not exactly
obstructing anything, but that's probably not the argument you wanna have to make in court. In addition, most States make it illegal to cross train tracks at any other place than a railroad crossing. A typical state criminal trespass law looks like this one from Kentucky, quote, "It shall be unlawful for any person "without the consent of the railroad "to go upon the track, property, "or right-of-way of a railroad, "other than to pass over
the track, property, "or right-of-way at a
public or private crossing." Therefore, hanging out by the train tracks to test the penny theory is probably, technically, trespassing. So, that seems to even things out, your parents three, you three. And now, we go on to the lightning round where we talk about ding-dong ditching, the act of going to someone's doorbell, ringing it, and then running away. When I asked this question
in the community section, someone said their parents warned them that it was illegal to play a
game called rat-a-tat ginger. And according to Wikipedia, this is an American variant of a game known as alternatively Knock Down Ginger, Ding Dong Ditch, Chap Door Run, Chappies, Knock Knock, Zoom Zoom, Bel-fast, Knick Knack and numerous other variants. Now, I promise I am not
making any of those up. These are various things for what we Americans call ding-dong ditching. But the essence of the
ding-dong door ditch is ringing a doorbell,
and then running away before someone answers it. And these days, your parents and you probably have the same general idea about why someone would do this, or why you shouldn't be doing this. Yeah, YouTube stunts don't always turn out the way that we think they do. But could this actually
constitute illegal trespassing? The verdict? Well, your parents
probably spoke the truth. It probably is illegal to play the game known as ding-dong door ditching, or any of the ridiculous
UK variants of that name, because you're probably
trespassing on private property. Here's how it breaks down. When the property has a sign
that says no trespassing, you can't knock on the
door for any reason. But if you ring the doorbell or knock when the house doesn't have a sign, this is probably legal if you're there for a legitimate reason,
like selling candy bars so you can go to band camp or whatever camp you wanted to go to. But if you're just there
to disturb the homeowner, and then run or hide away, well, the property owner could
potentially call the cops. And unfortunately, there
are lots of stories of angry homeowners doing
really bad things to children who ring the doorbell, and then run away. Not that those people are justified. You can see my entire video on "The Case of the Shotgun Booby Trap," that's highly illegal, but your parents are
probably more concerned about you being safe than
being arrested for trespass. So, okay, fine, maybe your parents didn't lie about absolutely everything, but you still can't trust them, especially because I
explain a whole bunch more honorable mentions of
things that you out there in the community provided of
things that your parents said which were clearly not illegal, and clearly were said only
for their own convenience, because I put an extended
version of this video on Nebula. "If I talked on the hour drive home "they could legally do
a citizen's arrest." In fact, almost all of my
videos have an ad-free, extended version that
comes out early on Nebula. And now you can get a huge discount bundled with CuriosityStream. Because, sometimes, talking about things that your parents said were illegal that actually weren't illegal is a little too hot for YouTube, which is why me and my
creator friends teamed up to build our own platform where creators don't need to worry about demonetization or the dreaded algorithm. It's called Nebula, and we're thrilled to be partnering with CuriosityStream, because Nebula's a place where creators can do what they do best, create, it's a place where we can both
house our content ad free, and also experiment with original content ans new series that probably
wouldn't work on YouTube. And Nebula features lots
of YouTube's top creators, like Extra Credits, Real
Engineering, Thomas Frank, and also, Half as Interesting is there. And we also get to collaborate in ways that probably wouldn't work on YouTube, like "Alex Goes Bananas,"
where I explain to a teenager all the crazy things
that happened in the '90s that he can't possibly comprehend because his tiny, teenage
brain is far too tiny. So, what does this have to
do with CuriosityStream? Well, as the go-to source for the best documentaries
on the internet, like Peter Sagal's "HI$TORY," they love educational creators. And we worked out a deal
where if you sign up for CuriosityStream with
the link in the description, you also get Nebula for free. And to be clear, that Nebula
subscription is not a trial, it's free for as long as you're
a CuriosityStream member. And only for the next couple of days, CuriosityStream is offering
41% off of their annual plans. That's less than $12 a year for both CuriosityStream
and Nebula together. And after that, you'll still get 26% off, which is still a smoking-hot deal for both CuriosityStream and Nebula. So, if you click on the
link in the description, you'll get both CuriosityStream
and Nebula for 41% off, or you can go to
CuriosityStream.com/LegalEagle. It's a great way to support this channel and educational content directly for now less than $12 a year for both CuriosityStream and Nebula. So, just click on the
link in the description, plus, clicking on that link
really helps out this channel. So, do you agree with my
analysis of the legal things that your parents said were illegal? Leave your objections in the comments, and check out this playlist over here with all of my other
videos about crazy laws and legal misunderstandings. So, click on this playlist,
and I'll see you in court.
